The Poly2 Pricing Thread

[Genie+]

They also hold all the cards at pricing, and have the power to move things faster by putting in incentives that buyers can't resist...which is what happened this summer with VGF..

And not only did the irresistible VGF summer incentives show how important pricing can be to direct sales, that move aligns with getting the non-restricted VGF sold out to cleanly make a break into the new era of 3 active WDW resorts - all equally restricted.

 

[Genie+]

If DVC has all 3 WDW active resorts with restrictions that makes it so much easier for them when the topic comes up during sales. It just becomes another footnote to potential buyers. A footnote that doesn’t apply to the buyer when they use their contract.

 

[SPLzero]

If DVC has all 3 WDW active resorts with restrictions that makes it so much easier for them when the topic comes up during sales. It just becomes another footnote to potential buyers. A footnote that doesn’t apply to the buyer when they use their contract.

It would be Interesting asking a DVC sales person how often resale actually gets brought up.

 

[Genie+]

It would be Interesting asking a DVC sales person how often resale actually gets brought up.

Great question. I’d love to hear their answer.

2 statistics have been thrown around over the years-
Only 1% of owners sell each year
Owners sell after an average of 7 years

Not sure what the number for the first stat actually is, but it must be very low when comparing all the resale contracts sold in one year compared to how many contracts were owned.

The second stat cannot be for the whole of DVC membership - the numbers don’t work. Maybe it works when applied only to contracts sold resale (not taking into account how many owners exist and how long they owned, or how many owners sold but still own other contracts and how long those have been owned, etc). Quite different thing.

I think these details are important where restrictions are concerned. If most owners are using their contracts at least 15 or 20 years, restrictions matter much less. Inflation alone will combat the perception restrictions killed resale value. Somebody who bought RIV last year for $180pp probably won’t feel bad selling in 2040 for over $100pp, especially not after taking 20 annual vacations on the contract. And the whole time they owned restrictions didn’t apply to them.

 

[walt34]

Great question. I’d love to hear their answer.

2 statistics have been thrown around over the years-
Only 1% of owners sell each year
Owners sell after an average of 7 years

Not sure what the number for the first stat actually is, but it must be very low when comparing all the resale contracts sold in one year compared to how many contracts were owned.

The second stat cannot be for the whole of DVC membership - the numbers don’t work. Maybe it works when applied only to contracts sold resale (not taking into account how many owners exist and how long they owned, or how many owners sold but still own other contracts and how long those have been owned, etc). Quite different thing.

I think these details are important where restrictions are concerned. If most owners are using their contracts at least 15 or 20 years, restrictions matter much less. Inflation alone will combat the perception restrictions killed resale value. Somebody who bought RIV last year for $180pp probably won’t feel bad selling in 2040 for over $100pp, especially not after taking 20 annual vacations on the contract. And the whole time they owned restrictions didn’t apply to them.

I'm not sure how interconnected the two numbers are. I guess it depends somewhat on how they are interpreted:

Does the second statistic mean 'contracts are held, on average, for 7 years' or 'those, who sell, have owned their contract on average for 7 years? If it is the first interpretation, I see a conflict with the 1% (should be higher), if it is the second interpretation, there is not much of a conflict.

I've never seen a source for these numbers, though. I'd take them with a grain of salt.

 

[Sandisw]

Great question. I’d love to hear their answer.

2 statistics have been thrown around over the years-
Only 1% of owners sell each year
Owners sell after an average of 7 years

Not sure what the number for the first stat actually is, but it must be very low when comparing all the resale contracts sold in one year compared to how many contracts were owned.

The second stat cannot be for the whole of DVC membership - the numbers don’t work. Maybe it works when applied only to contracts sold resale (not taking into account how many owners exist and how long they owned, or how many owners sold but still own other contracts and how long those have been owned, etc). Quite different thing.

I think these details are important where restrictions are concerned. If most owners are using their contracts at least 15 or 20 years, restrictions matter much less. Inflation alone will combat the perception restrictions killed resale value. Somebody who bought RIV last year for $180pp probably won’t feel bad selling in 2040 for over $100pp, especially not after taking 20 annual vacations on the contract. And the whole time they owned restrictions didn’t apply to them.

From what I have read, 7 to 10 year average ownership seems to apply only to contracts that are actually sold.

The other number is out of the total contracts owned at the resort…but when we think restrictions, it only applies when the original owner sells and after that it can change hands many times and have no impact on the resale vs direct ratio.

Most buyers don’t ask about resale…from my conversations with guides and sales people at the kiosks.

It’s not brought up unless the buyer brings it up. But that is why they have you sign the specific document when buying so you can’t buy without knowing they are there.

I also have read and heard that the average buyer doesn’t even think about resale and its value they way the Dis posters do.

So, over time, I just don’t see it being seen as anything but “the way”.

 

[BWV Dreamin]

For some reason I don’t think we are going to learn much about Poly2 at the DVC annual meeting. Maybe more about the FW cabins.

Disney still is cash strapped. They are not going to leave money on the table. All new stand alone DVC buildings have restrictions ( VGF the outlier, those buildings already there). I feel this new model is here to stay and no reason the new Poly2 would be an exception. JMHO.

 

[maui22]

For some reason I don’t think we are going to learn much about Poly2 at the DVC annual meeting. Maybe more about the FW cabins.

Personally, I will interpret any Poly talk as DVD having very low expectations for the FW Cabins.
One of those, pay no attention to the man behind the curtain marketing flops (Wizard of Oz).

 

[maui22]

Our friends over at the DVC Show spent some time this week talking about the likelihood, in their opinion, that Poly2 will be in the same association as Poly1. In my opinion, they’re wrong, but I think it’s a mistake for them to express that kind of confidence, especially if it winds up encouraging more Poly 1 buyers in the short term, thinking that they’ll probably be able to use their resale points to book Poly2. Maybe, but maybe not! They blame the Riviera’s slow sales on its restricted points, which is highly debatable.

Anyway, the show these days is really good, and all the new personalities and discussions they’ve initiated in this new era are working really well. It keeps getting better and better.

FWIW, Derek was asked during the show if Disney has ever had 4 resorts in active sales. He said they had not.
Sorry to correct him, but in 2009 DVC had 4 properties in active sales. AKV (Kidani), SSR (THV), BLT, and VGC all were in active sales. In fact, they all opened that year.

Disney was forced into some of the best promotions for buyers (terrible for Disney). VGC was fire sale priced around $85/pt. BLT was as low as $91/pt.

 

[ehh]

FWIW, Derek was asked during the show if Disney has ever had 4 resorts in active sales. He said they had not.
Sorry to correct him, but in 2009 DVC had 4 properties in active sales. AKV (Kidani), SSR (THV), BLT, and VGC all were in active sales. In fact, they all opened that year.

Disney was forced into some of the best promotions for buyers (terrible for Disney). VGC was fire sale priced around $85/pt. BLT was as low as $91/pt.

I haven't watched the show, and likely won't, but was the question about historical sales, as in pre-2023? Because ~half of 2023 also had 4 resorts on sale at once: AUL, RIV, VGF, and VDH.

I think it's fascinating that in 2024 we're likely to have five resorts on sale at once: AUL, RIV, VDH, CFW, and Poly2. Something for everyone.

 

[BamaGuy44]

Our friends over at the DVC Show spent some time this week talking about the likelihood, in their opinion, that Poly2 will be in the same association as Poly1. In my opinion, they’re wrong, but I think it’s a mistake for them to express that kind of confidence, especially if it winds up encouraging more Poly 1 buyers in the short term, thinking that they’ll probably be able to use their resale points to book Poly2. Maybe, but maybe not! They blame the Riviera’s slow sales on its restricted points, which is highly debatable.

Anyway, the show these days is really good, and all the new personalities and discussions they’ve initiated in this new era are working really well. It keeps getting better and better.

Not to be too cynical, but it is in their best interest to encourage resale purchases, so a bit self serving to take that stance IMO. As I've said many times, if they don't take the opportunity to make all those juicy Poly2 points restricted, I'll be amazed. Then again I don't know Jack about Squat, so I'm guessing like everyone else.

After ROFR stopped and Poly resale was dropping, I was very tempted to buy and roll the dice that the points would be good at Poly2. Couldn't do it, I'd rather wait and see what the decision is, and what the direct incentives look like.

 

[Mikey15]

I suppose AUL may technically be in “Active Sales” status, but is it really in “active sales?” They certainly don’t seem to care to sell it out. It’s kind of like the opposite case of VGF/BPK. Instead of taking cash rooms that are underperforming and turning them to studios, they’re taking studios that haven’t sold out and turning them into sweet cash bookings.

I haven’t listened to the question in question but maybe it was about whether there’s been 4 Disney World resorts in active sales, rather than DVC properties total? Just spitballing.

If you do count Aulani, they’ll technically be at 5 overall soon: Aul, Riv, VDH, CFW, Poly 2. I suppose it depends on when VDH sells out vs Poly starting sales, but there will likely be some overlap.

 

[ehh]

I suppose AUL may technically be in “Active Sales” status, but is it really in “active sales?” They certainly don’t seem to care to sell it out. It’s kind of like the opposite case of VGF/BPK. Instead of taking cash rooms that are underperforming and turning them to studios, they’re taking studios that haven’t sold out and turning them into sweet cash bookings.

I haven’t listened to the question in question but maybe it was about whether there’s been 4 Disney World resorts in active sales, rather than DVC properties total? Just spitballing.

If you do count Aulani, they’ll technically be at 5 overall soon: Aul, Riv, VDH, CFW, Poly 2. I suppose it depends on when VDH sells out vs Poly starting sales, but there will likely be some overlap.

VDH is on track to sell out in roughly 2030, they'd need to have a fire sale to clear inventory before Poly2

I think RIV much more likely to sell out before Poly2 (but I don't think it's outright likely, to be clear), being the only WDW resort for a few months, and then the only 'traditional' resort even when CFW is on sale.

 

[CarolynFH]

Disney was forced into some of the best promotions for buyers (terrible for Disney). VGC was fire sale priced around $85/pt. BLT was as low as $91/pt.

And buyers at BLT got a free 3-night DCL cruise, too.

 

[Nabas]

FWIW, Derek was asked during the show if Disney has ever had 4 resorts in active sales. He said they had not.
Sorry to correct him, but in 2009 DVC had 4 properties in active sales. AKV (Kidani), SSR (THV), BLT, and VGC all were in active sales. In fact, they all opened that year.

Disney was forced into some of the best promotions for buyers (terrible for Disney). VGC was fire sale priced around $85/pt. BLT was as low as $91/pt.

This coincided with the Great Recession, so it was a double whammy for DVC prices.

This was when you could buy BCV resale for $60 per point!

 

[Cfabar1]

I still am holding out hope for the same association.

Saves money
Gets DVC wrapped up neatly at 2066 for Polynesian
Would be very confusing for the customer why they can book some but not all rooms at 11 months “but I thought I owned polynesian”
Can market bungalows as part of the package

It may be wishful thinking as my preference would be to not buy a restricted resort if I buy direct from Disney.

This summer proved that if you sell a compelling product with affordable dues and a reasonable price, they can move DVC product still. And you can get a shoutout in the earnings call for doing a great business for the firm. I’ll be curious to see where sales numbers go this fall.

If VDH, AUL, and RIV stay at their current prices and sales levels, DVC will really need to rethink things. I also think the cabins may prove to be a half baked program that people just say no to.

Biggest reason I see in favor of poly being a new association is this is a great location and people will pay for it. It will also hold resale value nicely I think.

 

[drjulianof]

I have not seen it but someone mentioned that one reason they believe it will be the same is that they had done nothing to get approval to sell it as new to other states, etc.

Was that part of it? If so, did they address whether all that was being done for yet for FW? Because it would be in the works since we know now that will open first.

I do agree that it is risky to come out and be so confident when there is nothing official yet.

Exactly. Shouldn't all these permits in the states in the US and in every other country already be going on given their time frame?

 

[Sandisw]

I still am holding out hope for the same association.

Saves money
Gets DVC wrapped up neatly at 2066 for Polynesian
Would be very confusing for the customer why they can book some but not all rooms at 11 months “but I thought I owned polynesian”
Can market bungalows as part of the package

It may be wishful thinking as my preference would be to not buy a restricted resort if I buy direct from Disney.

This summer proved that if you sell a compelling product with affordable dues and a reasonable price, they can move DVC product still. And you can get a shoutout in the earnings call for doing a great business for the firm. I’ll be curious to see where sales numbers go this fall.

If VDH, AUL, and RIV stay at their current prices and sales levels, DVC will really need to rethink things. I also think the cabins may prove to be a half baked program that people just say no to.

Biggest reason I see in favor of poly being a new association is this is a great location and people will pay for it. It will also hold resale value nicely I think.

Except people bought CCV without access to BRV as a home resort. The tower has not been given a name yet so if they want to keep it its own, it will be easy to know the difference as each will be unique.

People keep mentioning bungalows but you still get access…easy to sell them without having to have home resort…VGF is right there which they can also push as how flexible DVC is…you get the Grand, you get BLT, and those wonderful bungalows!

 

[maui22]

And buyers at BLT got a free 3-night DCL cruise, too.

Wasn’t that part of a different promotion? Might have been full price (or close), but you received the cruise.

 

[maui22]

This coincided with the Great Recession, so it was a double whammy for DVC prices.

This was when you could buy BCV resale for $60 per point!

Didnt resale prices bottomed around 2011 or 2012? Most of Disneys foreclosures didn’t happen until 2010-2011.
They used to use a third party for financing. Things were so bad the company stopped and Disney started financing DVC mortgages themselves.

I recall a few people posted they were putting in extremely low offers because so many had to sell and few were buying. They claimed to have bought a couple BWV contracts in the upper $20s.